Should people worry really about Hollywood retrofitting on TV Shows

[Pete from Boston]

Ha!  When cable came out decades ago, the bullshit hype was "you pay for it, so ads are unnecessary." 

Couch potato nation isn't prone to fight back when lied to, nor to learn much from the past.

[vdeane]

Hey, isn't the whole point of ditching cable to, you know, ditch cable, not replace it with something that's essentially identical?  If I wanted cable, I would buy it.  Even Hulu Plus had added an ad-free plan.

Regardless, paying $6/month for just one show doesn't make economical sense.  Assuming the 20 episodes/year model that Voyager and Enterprise used, that's $3.60 per episode - about double the a la carte price for currently running shows on Amazon.

[jwolfer]

Hey, isn't the whole point of ditching cable to, you know, ditch cable, not replace it with something that's essentially identical?  If I wanted cable, I would buy it.  Even Hulu Plus had added an ad-free plan.

Regardless, paying $6/month for just one show doesn't make economical sense.  Assuming the 20 episodes/year model that Voyager and Enterprise used, that's $3.60 per episode - about double the a la carte price for currently running shows on Amazon.

You can get Netflix for $10/month.. Has all the TNG, DS9, voyager and Enterprise episodes.. Of course you need internet service $50/month . I'd you live close to transmitters you can get local channels with antenna.. Much cheaper than the packages cable companies offer

[vdeane]

Hey, isn't the whole point of ditching cable to, you know, ditch cable, not replace it with something that's essentially identical?  If I wanted cable, I would buy it.  Even Hulu Plus had added an ad-free plan.

Regardless, paying $6/month for just one show doesn't make economical sense.  Assuming the 20 episodes/year model that Voyager and Enterprise used, that's $3.60 per episode - about double the a la carte price for currently running shows on Amazon.

You can get Netflix for $10/month.. Has all the TNG, DS9, voyager and Enterprise episodes.. Of course you need internet service $50/month . I'd you live close to transmitters you can get local channels with antenna.. Much cheaper than the packages cable companies offer

What's really interesting is that is, in fact, my current setup, and that is about what I pay for internet (at least until my two year discount ends in six months).  Of course, if you want to watch the new Star Trek right when it airs, you're out of luck (I'm also wondering if CBS is going to pull Star Trek from Netflix to push All Access).

[kkt]

I really hate ads.  The only way I'd watch a channel with ads would be for breaking news in the event of a natural disaster near me or something.  I guess that would be if the Internet was down.
I'd pay for steaming if the show was good, but not if I still get ads in it.

[Pete from Boston]

Hey, isn't the whole point of ditching cable to, you know, ditch cable, not replace it with something that's essentially identical?  If I wanted cable, I would buy it.  Even Hulu Plus had added an ad-free plan.

Regardless, paying $6/month for just one show doesn't make economical sense.  Assuming the 20 episodes/year model that Voyager and Enterprise used, that's $3.60 per episode - about double the a la carte price for currently running shows on Amazon.

The point of ditching cable, for me, was that people who watch a lot of TV have lower life expectancies, but I digress.

When cable came out, it was sold as "something different" from broadcast TV with regard to ads.  It is now, as you put it, "something that's essentially identical."

The reality of 2015 (and before, and after) is that you can buy your way out of ads, and then there will be new ads to really-we-mean-it-this-time buy your way out of.  And so on and so on.

[triplemultiplex]

No wonder people pirate content.  Paying to stream is a rip-off if you still need to endure commercials.
Hell I'd rather buy a DVD set than pay to watch commercials.  At least then I own it forever and don't need the internet to view my property.

[roadman65]

That is interesting that when the President interrupts the programming, there is no commercials during his talk which is showing respect, but in actuality the TV network has to give back time bought by the sponsors that would have aired while whomever, both Bush's, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Clinton, and now Obama talked about the usual BS a President must talk about.  That must hurt them big, especially after 9/11 when all networks had a special report for almost 3 days without ads.  The millions they lost to cover the WTC attacks for over 72 hours, had to hurt them.

[kkt]

In the short run, sure, but the attacks brought so many more viewers over the next months and years that I'm sure the networks made up what they lost in ad revenue for the first few days.

[vdeane]

That is interesting that when the President interrupts the programming, there is no commercials during his talk which is showing respect, but in actuality the TV network has to give back time bought by the sponsors that would have aired while whomever, both Bush's, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Clinton, and now Obama talked about the usual BS a President must talk about.  That must hurt them big, especially after 9/11 when all networks had a special report for almost 3 days without ads.  The millions they lost to cover the WTC attacks for over 72 hours, had to hurt them.

Is that why sports broadcasts that overrun their scheduled timeslot will have a commercial break at the end even as they're cutting out regular programming?

[jeffandnicole]

That is interesting that when the President interrupts the programming, there is no commercials during his talk which is showing respect, but in actuality the TV network has to give back time bought by the sponsors that would have aired while whomever, both Bush's, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Clinton, and now Obama talked about the usual BS a President must talk about.  That must hurt them big, especially after 9/11 when all networks had a special report for almost 3 days without ads.  The millions they lost to cover the WTC attacks for over 72 hours, had to hurt them.

Is that why sports broadcasts that overrun their scheduled timeslot will have a commercial break at the end even as they're cutting out regular programming?

While it probably depends on the actual sport, I'm sure those commercials during the sporting events are much more valuable to the network than the commercials during whatever show comes on afterwards!

[GCrites]

^Such as Heidi

[roadman65]

Speaking of commercials why does the NFL break for one right after the ball is returned after each touchdown?  First you have the commercial after the extra point, then you come back to the last team to have the ball kick it to the opponent, and then go right back to ads one more time before the game resumes?

[Pete from Boston]

Speaking of commercials why does the NFL break for one right after the ball is returned after each touchdown?  First you have the commercial after the extra point, then you come back to the last team to have the ball kick it to the opponent, and then go right back to ads one more time before the game resumes?

Makes $en$e to me.

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

[mrsman]

Speaking of commercials why does the NFL break for one right after the ball is returned after each touchdown?  First you have the commercial after the extra point, then you come back to the last team to have the ball kick it to the opponent, and then go right back to ads one more time before the game resumes?

Makes $en$e to me.

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

Be thankful for the commercials, it helps keep football on free TV.  Every game of your local NFL team is broadcast on a regular TV station.  That is not true with basketball, hockey, or baseball anymore, as most of those games require a cable package.

[The Nature Boy]

Speaking of commercials why does the NFL break for one right after the ball is returned after each touchdown?  First you have the commercial after the extra point, then you come back to the last team to have the ball kick it to the opponent, and then go right back to ads one more time before the game resumes?

Makes $en$e to me.

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

Be thankful for the commercials, it helps keep football on free TV.  Every game of your local NFL team is broadcast on a regular TV station.  That is not true with basketball, hockey, or baseball anymore, as most of those games require a cable package.

As a Red Sox fan, I'll attest to this. I have to get cable to get NESN, which sucks.

[GCrites]

All those old ladies would miss their soaps when baseball was on the rabbit ears. Or they'd have to wake up at 3AM to see them.

[US71]

Be thankful for the commercials, it helps keep football on free TV.  Every game of your local NFL team is broadcast on a regular TV station.  That is not true with basketball, hockey, or baseball anymore, as most of those games require a cable package.

I thought the NFL was tax-exempt?

[Pete from Boston]

Speaking of commercials why does the NFL break for one right after the ball is returned after each touchdown?  First you have the commercial after the extra point, then you come back to the last team to have the ball kick it to the opponent, and then go right back to ads one more time before the game resumes?

Makes $en$e to me.

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

Be thankful for the commercials, it helps keep football on free TV.  Every game of your local NFL team is broadcast on a regular TV station.  That is not true with basketball, hockey, or baseball anymore, as most of those games require a cable package.

As a Red Sox fan, I'll attest to this. I have to get cable to get NESN, which sucks.

The Olde Towne Teame, so close and dear to the hearts of its fans, pulled its one over-the-air game per week, declaring that it is "not in the business of giving away the product for free." 

[The Nature Boy]

Speaking of commercials why does the NFL break for one right after the ball is returned after each touchdown?  First you have the commercial after the extra point, then you come back to the last team to have the ball kick it to the opponent, and then go right back to ads one more time before the game resumes?

Makes $en$e to me.

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

Be thankful for the commercials, it helps keep football on free TV.  Every game of your local NFL team is broadcast on a regular TV station.  That is not true with basketball, hockey, or baseball anymore, as most of those games require a cable package.

As a Red Sox fan, I'll attest to this. I have to get cable to get NESN, which sucks.

The Olde Towne Teame, so close and dear to the hearts of its fans, pulled its one over-the-air game per week, declaring that it is "not in the business of giving away the product for free."

I just want the MLB to change its blackout rules. I'll pay for MLB.tv to watch the Sox.

[kkt]

Speaking of commercials why does the NFL break for one right after the ball is returned after each touchdown?  First you have the commercial after the extra point, then you come back to the last team to have the ball kick it to the opponent, and then go right back to ads one more time before the game resumes?

Makes $en$e to me.

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

Be thankful for the commercials, it helps keep football on free TV.  Every game of your local NFL team is broadcast on a regular TV station.  That is not true with basketball, hockey, or baseball anymore, as most of those games require a cable package.

As a Red Sox fan, I'll attest to this. I have to get cable to get NESN, which sucks.

The Olde Towne Teame, so close and dear to the hearts of its fans, pulled its one over-the-air game per week, declaring that it is "not in the business of giving away the product for free." 

So, we'll be taking our stadium back, then.  Have fun playing in a vacant lot.

[The Nature Boy]

Speaking of commercials why does the NFL break for one right after the ball is returned after each touchdown?  First you have the commercial after the extra point, then you come back to the last team to have the ball kick it to the opponent, and then go right back to ads one more time before the game resumes?

Makes $en$e to me.

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

Be thankful for the commercials, it helps keep football on free TV.  Every game of your local NFL team is broadcast on a regular TV station.  That is not true with basketball, hockey, or baseball anymore, as most of those games require a cable package.

As a Red Sox fan, I'll attest to this. I have to get cable to get NESN, which sucks.

The Olde Towne Teame, so close and dear to the hearts of its fans, pulled its one over-the-air game per week, declaring that it is "not in the business of giving away the product for free." 

So, we'll be taking our stadium back, then.  Have fun playing in a vacant lot.

Fenway Park was built using private funds

[Pete from Boston]

Speaking of commercials why does the NFL break for one right after the ball is returned after each touchdown?  First you have the commercial after the extra point, then you come back to the last team to have the ball kick it to the opponent, and then go right back to ads one more time before the game resumes?

Makes $en$e to me.

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

Be thankful for the commercials, it helps keep football on free TV.  Every game of your local NFL team is broadcast on a regular TV station.  That is not true with basketball, hockey, or baseball anymore, as most of those games require a cable package.

As a Red Sox fan, I'll attest to this. I have to get cable to get NESN, which sucks.

The Olde Towne Teame, so close and dear to the hearts of its fans, pulled its one over-the-air game per week, declaring that it is "not in the business of giving away the product for free." 

So, we'll be taking our stadium back, then.  Have fun playing in a vacant lot.

Whose stadium?  "Fenway Sports Group" owns Fenway Park.   

What really should be taken back is Yawkey Way.  There seems to be little disagreement that giving the Red Sox rights to it on game days for a song was a breach of the public trust, and that since no law was explicitly broken this arrangement is unlikely to be reversed.

Really makes me wish that some of the new towers going up on Boylston street had sports bars on the top floor where people could watch the game without the Red Sox getting a dime.

[roadman]

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

I used to think the same about inning changes in baseball, until I actually went to a live game instead of seeing it on TV.  TV delays seems much longer only because of the commercials, but the delays at the stadium didn't seem to be that long at all.

[Pete from Boston]

It can be annoying, but no amount of TV commercials during a football game is as hard to take as the effect of those commercials on the experience of the people in the stadium.  Live NFL football has more artificial dead time and it than anything I can imagine sitting through.

I used to think the same about inning changes in baseball, until I actually went to a live game instead of seeing it on TV.  TV delays seems much longer only because of the commercials, but the delays at the stadium didn't seem to be that long at all.

This is a significant difference between commercial breaks in baseball and football.  At a baseball game, there is a rhythm and order to the breaks.  They do not feel out of place in the live event, because there is a clear use of that time.  At football games, the variation in time between certain plays, dictated by the assignment of commercials to those points, feels much more arbitrary and disruptive.